"I went to Jerusalem to become acquainted (Gk. istoria) with Cephas" - Paul's words from Galatians 1:18.

An Email from Dr. Klouda Revealing Her Feelings

I received the following email today from Dr. Sheri Klouda. It is published here with permission. We continue to raise funds for her family during her husband's illness. Feel free to send your tax deductible contribution to Emmanuel Baptist Church, c/o The Sheri Klouda Family Benevolence Fund, 2505 W. Garriott, Enid, Oklahoma 73703.

Pastor Wade:

I am still trying to deal with the disappointment of Judge McBryde's ruling, and I still do not know what options we have left, but I wanted to write and let you and Mr. Cole know how much I appreciate your continued support. If it were not for both of you, the real facts would never be known, and I am grateful that Dr. Patterson's actual words have been published publicly. I am glad that folks will realize I did not fabricate my claims, and it is important that they understand I meant no malice in my efforts to seek correction of the injustice against our family. I was really hopeful that we might realize success and gain some of what we lost. Nevertheless, God's will be done.

I am not sure whether the lawsuit was a wise move with regard to my professional career. Oftentimes a charge of discrimination against a former employer follows a woman's career for life. In addition, I had hoped to return someday to Baptist life and teach in a Baptist college or seminary. I am not sure whether the damage is irreparable or whether there is enough Baptist support out there to help me realize that hope. Once again, only God knows where he wants me to serve, and I continue to appreciate the opportunity he has given me to work with college students at Taylor.

I am waiting to hear whether Mr. Richardson considers an appeal a wise course of action. In the meantime, thank you both for your initiative and your activism, for your concern and your desire to see righteousness among our Baptist leaders. I am still Baptist, which demonstrates my commitment and the integrity of my beliefs. My family is struggling with the actions of so-called believers who hurt others, who deny the truth and manipulate people and institutions. I sought to do the best job I could at Southwestern as I tried to meet all the needs of my students through God's grace. I have to believe the Scriptures that tell us that "all things work together for good, for those who love God." I am grateful that I touched so many lives while teaching in one of our Southern Baptist seminaries. I long to hear how my students fare as they branch out all over the world.

I felt a word was overdue. I have so much more to say, and yet, I cannot find the words yet. But others are finding the words for me as I seek to deal with the discouragement and what this decision means for our family. I am touched by the willingness of others to take over and carry the message on my behalf.

Finally we have a federal judge willing to stand up for the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution and declare this law suit what it always has been: frivilous litigation tying down the courts when they need to be prosecuting the criminals. There are a few good local judges like this who follow Anton Scalia and Clarence Thomas who actually believe in the Constitution and reject the liberal model of judicial activism. This decision is a good day for America. There is now hope for getting America back on track.

It isn't the time or place to go into a rant about Baptists right now (I have been one for over 30 years) - but this proves the words that I am always saying about how we should focus more on the Bible and less on the human-boundary denominational separations that we have all created for ourselves. Thank you for posting this letter, I am glad to hear an update on her well-being.

I have not met Dr. Klouda. In this correspondence, she certainly presents a gracious side and optimism that will serve her well in life.

There are many religious institutions, including Baptist institutions, where she will be able to use her gifts and training.

I do believe that she was not advised well in this situation. Having sued a former employer for all of the counts alleged, and for punitive damages, no less, will give some employers pause and will no doubt close some doors for her. I know that many of my clients would take a pass on a prospective employee who had filed a high profile lawsuit against a former employer if there was another candidate without that history.

But I believe she will go forward in life and I wish her well in her future endeavors.

Louis, I agree that it may not have been the best action to take. However when you are pressed for cash you may do things that normally you would not do, especially in a situation that she found herself in. I do agree that suing your employer probably causes more trouble than it is worth. The laws are to protect employees from wrongdoing but IMHO they are probably mute unless the employee goes back to the place they sued. I'm sure many employers will be gun shy in hiring someone that sues an employer. Bosses always have the upper hand, sad to say. The Bible states on how that relationship should be but from time to time bosses use their power to slam down employees they do not like.

I'm not SBC but I know what it is like to be pressed for cash. It's bad enough when it is just yourself. I live in an area that was hit hard by many companies closing within a few years. It was five years before I was able to get back on my feet. I have empathy for her. I also understand being a caretaker for a sick person. It is a lot of stress when you have the funds like we were fortunate to have with my father. To have that stress on top of financial pressures must be amazing.

I hope that others will help her if they are able. She needs cash, even more now with the ruling. I'm sure even just a few dollars will help.

I will be shocked if Gary Richardson does not appeal the decision. He does not give up easily. He sued ORU 24 or 25 times before getting a lawsuit that started the cleanup there. The body of Christ did not do their job in dealing with the excesses and dictatoral leadership so unfortunately the courts forced the issue. That lawsuit has had positive results for the school. For that I'm grateful as an alum.

Good thoughts. Money is a strong motivator (and not from a greed sense).

Still, I thought that she was offered a research position with the same salary and benefits? And I don't know about how the health insurance works in a job change. I am sure it depends on a lot of factors.

Again, I don't know enough to really comment on the pressures that drove this, and I am not making a personal judgment about Dr. K.

Just wondering after all is said and done if Dr. K got the best advice.

I know nothing about ORU at all. Just recently saw some sad news about all that.

I think that the case will be appealed. I will not make a firm prediction about what will happen. If the trial court's research is correct, it seems to me that it might take a U.S. Supreme Court decision to change the law on this. The Supremes are not likely to take this case.

"I do believe that she was not advised well in this situation. Having sued a former employer for all of the counts alleged, and for punitive damages, no less, will give some employers pause and will no doubt close some doors for her. I know that many of my clients would take a pass on a prospective employee who had filed a high profile lawsuit against a former employer if there was another candidate without that history.

But I believe she will go forward in life and I wish her well in her future endeavors."

Louis, Those are two diametrically opposed thoughts.

I can certainly understand her position and thinking. It is astonishing when professing believers could care less about basic fairness and justice. As we can see by some comments here some seem to be not only gleeful about it but could really care less about her as a sister in Christ.

I believe Dr. Klouda says in her deposition that she was never offered a full-time position in the library at the same salary and benefits or less, othwerwise, she would have accepted it given her financial situation and her desire to maintain stability in the family amidst a great deal of stress. She admits being told she could do something in the library temporarily (until Dec 31, 2006) to compensate for her salary, but her employment would not continue regardless. There was no contract or formal offer to stay in any position at the seminary, or she would have done so for the sake of her family.

Here's an idea and an opportunity for the SBC to right this situation - and to see just who thinks someone should be fired from their position because they are a woman: At the next Annual SBC meeting, ask to collect a one-time offering for the Klouda Fund. And ask that the first gift be from Paige Patterson - in front of the entire Convention - put him right on the spot.

Also, can someone challenge Baylor or another seminary to hire her? Or maybe someone offer to establish and headup a committee to help her find a job EQUAL to what she was doing at SWBTS?

Also, I think someone should print up the portions of Patterson's statements in his SWORN deposition that has been posted on the SBC Outpost (or whatever it is) and lay it on the chairs - all 8000+ chairs.

Those of you on here who may be attending the big convention, I would begin to think outside the box a little. Get creative. Since the Courts have said this is a matter for the SBC to settle - then settle it...once and for all. For your daughters, wives, sisters, and future generations of women Hebrew and seminary professors. This is a real opportunity to stand up and make a statement about what Baptists believe about women and how they should be treated. Or are you going to let Patterson take that stand for you?

Uh, Anonymous, we would if you could give to me a detailed job desciption for a woman with a doctorate in Hebrew as it relates to a Southern Baptist Church. Usually, Southern Baptists with rational minds understand that you give doctorates in the Hebrew language to qualify the person to teach Hebrew to those who need to learn it.

I have real mixed feelings on this one. As much as in pains me to say it, as staunch supporter of the separation of church and state I have to agree with the judge's ruling. However, as a strong believer in justice, I stongly believe someone in the SBC hegemony needs to stand up for Dr. Klouda's rights. (Anyone who thinks that's going to happen, please contact me about some prime beach front property in Arizona) On the other hand, (yes I know that makes 3 hands, but I never claimed to be normal), those of you in the SBC who participated in and/or supported the fundy takeover are now reaping what you sowed.

Well, I finally got around to reading the Judges ruling and opinion. It was thoughtful and well written, and it contained years of legal history defending the First Amendment. Statements like... "The people of the United States conveyed no power to Congress to vest its courts with jurisdiction to settle purely ecclesiastical disputes."

I only wish in this age of Judical Activism, more judges felt this way. I think someone should advise Dr. Klouda that this case is not winable (it cannot even make it to court). And... before I sent money to help her, I would want to know if the money is going to be used to help her or pay her lawyer bills.

I might be mistaken, but I believe Dr. Klouda's counsel took this case on a contingency basis--she loses, they lose.

I am not certain but I think I heard that her daughter cancelled a school trip abroad and will not be going on some mission trip to Honduras with the church youth this summer so she can work and help out her mom-- I hardly think any donated money will pay for her attorneys, though I am sure Wade can find out.

Wade,There are scores of pastors across the convention that have Ph.D.s in OT, NT, Systematics, etc. that are in pastoral ministry. If the seminaries are doing their jobs, they equip students to be pastors, regardless of the field in which they major.

You come across as a real hard hearted person. Keep your money--God will provide for Dr. Klouda's needs. Maybe if you would put yourself in her place--oh heaven forbid-she is a woman, you can't do that can you?

I'm sorry you believe me to be hard hearted. I felt it a legitimate question. After all, she is sueing a Convention Seminary. Seems odd to me, that some would ask Southern Baptists to give money so that she can continue to sue us. Where do you think the funds would come from if a monetary decision in her favor was reached?

We cannot yet say whether suing was the best thing for Dr. Klouda's personal life & career (God alone knows), but she is a hero among Christian women for having the courage to do so. When Alice Paul went to jail for picketing for suffrage at the White House gate, that was probably not the best thing for Alice Paul. She did it for the women she knew, for their daughters and granddaughters, for me and my daughters.

I was devastated to see that Dr. Klouda's case was dismissed. Nevertheless, all women must keep fighting this battle until the SBC realizes that women are people and must be treated justly and fairly.

For folks speculating where the defense money, etc, came from in the Klouda lawsuit, I'm assuming that the Seminary has the necessary insurance to cover the suit (and defense costs and/or a judgment, if any); that insurance would also protect Dr. Patterson personally as he was an employee of the entity. So unless someone produces evidence that they did NOT have EPL coverage, please quit yammering about the costs.

As for whether Klouda was correct in suing Patterson, I think she was, but for different reasons. In my opinion I don’t see how the Judge could have concluded otherwise, as the present laws constrained him. But now people will be thinking about how we can protect religious freedom and also protect those who can be abused by religious freedom used incorrectly. Perhaps someone will come up with a judicially correct answer.

If Klouda had not sued Patterson, her injustices would have easily been swept under the patriarchal privilege rug and none of us would have understood the scope of the injustices. Now the world knows. The world needed to know. Non-Christians needed to know that other Christians do not approve of the stances that Patterson and his followers are taking.

And as for where the money is coming from for Klouda, it should come also from fellow Baptists who see the injustice of the whole thing. Certainly, Patterson COULD have allowed Klouda to find work elsewhere before letting her go. He COULD have offered her financial assistance in relocating. He COULD have even given her a praiseworthy reference for the excellent praiseworthy job she did while there. There are many other avenues that Patterson could have taken. The avenue he did take was arrogant, heartless, harmful and a bad witness for Christianity.

No Baptist needs to change his mind on whether or not female professors can teach the Bible or Biblical language to adults to see that how this was done was bad. Just for that reason, it would be redeeming for fellow Baptists to willingly contribute to Klouda’s financial assistance.

Joe W: I retired 2/1 from a career in that end of the insurance industry, which dates back to April 1958. And I assure you that concern over insurance premiums and defense costs in unwarranted in an organization like the SBC.

I plan to up my game in fighting for Dr. Sheri Kouda. I am a SWBTS alumni from 97 and 02. I have been silent on her situation, but the recent court ruling is sickening. I'm not an expert at law, but spiritually this make me want to ...excuse me...vomit. Dr. Klouda is an excellent professor. I hope she goes to Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. They have their heads on straight there.

I plan to blog and write letters and emails to many in the days ahead.

I am not a fan of bashing the SWBTS President, but this is just not right. I think I am ready to fight this one. I don't wish anything bad on SWBTS, but this one is ugly. There's no cleaning it up either. As a matter of fact, they need to get rid of all women professors in the Education School to be consistent. Are they not also "explaining the text" when they provide a biblical foundation for education?

Dr. Klouda, it may not "feel" as if you did the right thing professionally, but spiritually you did. God has your back. Taking a stand for something like "genderism" is always dicey and pricey. I pray God's blessing on you 100 fold soon.

And for you so called conservatives who are calling me a liberal right now, I am in no one's camp but God's. He's not impressed with this kind of thing against Dr. Klouda. If you can dismiss this action in the name of doctrine, you're missing something.

Many in the Body of Christ, Baptists and non-Baptists, are praying and believing God will ultimately be the judge. Dr. Klouda is a woman of strength and character, and I wish I could be one of her students.

I'm a former student of Dr. Klouda's and would like to send her a personal note. Would it be possible to send a card to Emmanuel to be forwarded to her? I'd be happy to e-mail you my contact information.

"Where does the money come from to pay for that insurance and its increase in premiums? I'd like to have one of those NO cost insurance policies... can you point me in the right direction?"

Joe, I sat on many non profit boards and they all had liability insurance for just this sort of thing. They are paying the premiums no matter if they get sued or not.

" believer333 said... If Klouda had not sued Patterson, her injustices would have easily been swept under the patriarchal privilege rug and none of us would have understood the scope of the injustices. Now the world knows. The world needed to know. Non-Christians needed to know that other Christians do not approve of the stances that Patterson and his followers are taking."

I totally agree. I think this has been a huge wake up call. Not just about Patterson but about what we believe and how we treat our brothers and sisters in the Body. Christians do not hide their dirty laundry. They wash it.

Where's the NOW crowd on this one? They should be up in arms and sending press releases to all the national media outlets. I for one will pray for Dr. Klouda and with she could come to Texas and teach at one of our fine Baptist universities.

I served a congregation with a senior pastor holding a PhD in OT from one of the SBC's seminaries. We heard more Sunday morning sermons from the OT than I'd heard before that time or since. However, otherwise the fellow couldn't minister his way out of a wet paper sack. He doesn't serve that church any longer, either. He would have been a good professor, though.

At least in his case, that seminary-trained senior pastor's PhD did the church little good day-to-day.

I wish someone who knows something about this decision would address the stated reasons for it.

At one extreme, I can see how the First Amendment should keep the government from telling a church who should be its pastor and that it had to hire a female or gay.

On the other hand, at the opposite extreme, I don't see why the First Amendment should apply to someone cleaning dishes in the cafeteria, mowing the grass, working on the roof, teaching in the day care center, or unstopping a drain. At some point I think the government should be able to require SWBTS to follow the laws that apply to all other employers. SWBTS has to pay social security and minimum wage.

Is a untenured Hebrew teacher more like a pastor or someone performing labor, or putting in time. Because plumbing requires years of training and skill too, that doesn't seem like a determining factor. Serving as a pastor seems to involve materially different responsibilities from teaching students.

I of course know nothing of your specific situation and fully admit that many Ph.D. Pastors are "duds" but that has nothing to do with their Ph.D. or their ability to minister effectively to the "so called" "day-to-day" needs of the congregation. Are you saying you did not have an effective board of Deacons as well? I am learning that the modern role of pastor is that person which preaches and ministers to each individual in the church and ensures that each congregant is happy and well taken care of in life. I read the other day where Dr. Stetzer factors in 10 hours per week for pastoral sermon prep. What a joke! I would much rather hear OT sermons than hear about Aunt Martha's bunions. A pastors primary job is to exposit and preach the Word. Nothing else is more important. Only today, we leave the expositing to the libertarian view of a flock who could not exegete their way out of a "wet paper sack." Thank God for those pastors who cloister themselves in the Study, praying and pouring over Scriptures for hours upon hours breaking the Bread of Life for the sheep.

Too bad God doesn't (1) fill the pulpits with men who have all the necessary tools to make the sheep happy, and (2) design the church so that the sheep share in the labor and pains of daily life.

I have been doing this for 3 months now. I really need to hurry and write a book while I still know everything.

I wonder if Dr. Paige Patterson gave clear notification to the SBC and the SWBTS Board of Trustees what would happen to women professors as soon as he became President of SWBTS.

If Dr. Patterson did not give clear notification, he was deceptive. Deception comes from the word "to deceive." Deceit is used by those who use instruments of darkness to work out their will.

I started to say sin started when Dr. Patterson ordered Dr. Klouda to his office or sent an emissary, but I think sin in this case started when the people of the SBC were not clearly informed what would be Dr. Patterson's personal agenda once he became President of our seminary or sin happened when SWBTS hired Dr. Klouda.

You cannot hire Dr. Klouda as a Professor of Hebrew and then hire Dr. Patterson to be her boss and make those hires inside the will of God unless deception took place for she was hired before Dr. Patterson.

I take the BoT could tell that Dr. Klouda was a woman just by looking at her and her given name, Sherri, should have been a clue; whereas they should have known just as clearly what Dr. Patterson believed about women teaching men unless they were deceived by him.

Ten hours a week for sermon prep does seem inadequate and even approaching lazy. The beauty of an elder led Body is that each man can focus on his God-given gifts and each member knows how their leaders are serving their needs. And the man who labors in the OT has unfortunately lost a valuable resource in learning the original language...but me thinks not for long.

You asked a good question about where the law draws the line in distinguishing between those positions that are religious in nature (thus invoking the ecclesiastical protection) and those that are simply functional - grass cutting, janitors etc.

The law does recognize that distinction, but pretty much leaves it up to the religion to define what is ecclesiastical. For example, the guy who cuts the grass at a Baptist Church probably gets $5 per hour, if that, is has not ecclesiastical function.

The guy who cuts the grass at a monastery might be a monk, so the position may have some legitimate ecclesiastical claim.

The courts basically defer to the religion. The test is "sincere religious belief." The belief doesn't have to be correct, or necessarily consistent with what others in the same religion may belief (unless, of course, it's so far out it's ridiculous).

Reading the excerpts of Dr. P's depo show that it was clearly a doctrinal motivation that led him to his decision. Many may not agree with that decision, and one can argue that it's not mandated by or consistent with Baptist doctrine, but those kid of arguments simply emphasize that the dispute is religious in nature.

Also, in this case, the faculty handbook stated that decisions regarding the faculty are ecclesiastical in nature.

Title VII, I believe, has a specific religious exception, but I don't know the language that is used.

Most employees in Tennessee, where I live, are employees at will. They can be terminated for any reason or no reason at all - but not for a prohibited reason (race, gender, religious discrimination). And there are the religious exemptions that apply to the exceptions.

So, the person cooking or cutting the grass can be terminated as an at will employee with no explanation given. If they are of a certain gender or race, they could claim that illegal discrimination has taken place. The employer could just show some non-prohibited reason for their termination.

Other, higher up, employees in a church or non-profit/church related setting would probably be covered by the ecclesiastical exemption.

Hope this helps. It's not a very good explanation, but am limited by time.

I'm not SBC so I may not have my facts straight. However I believe it was stated that Dr. Patterson had told her that she did not have to worry about her position since she was already there. The inference was that she understood his doctrinal position of not believing that women should teach men but that her position was safe. This might be hearsay I suppose. It is also my understand that there is no really official statement on the issue of women teaching men in any documents, bylaws or whatever defines the guidelines for the SBC. If I'm wrong about this please someone clarify this.

Assuming I'm right about this it appears that even though there is a doctrinal issue it also seems like it is wrong to me to tell someone that they have a job then switch. Can this really be supported by the so-called doctrinal claim, especially since this put her in a horrible predicament? If there is nothing officially stated about this for the SBC how can this enforced as such as a SBC doctrine?

From other comments I have read the SBC is not a denomination but it appears that some want it to function like one. I guess this is a lot of the debate. Hopefully the Lord will be able to help you all resolve this. If nothing else stuff like this is breeding a lot of confusion and hurt needlessly.

i wonder if you and ben can shed light on us about a release from bp news. it seems that the president of baylor u. is denying tenure to a lot of professors there. it seems that even a woman prof. named dr. rene massengale was denied tenure even though she had a million dollar grant for her studies. and, the baylor powers that be arent giving the baylor prof’s denied tenure two years, but only one year, to find somewhere else to go.

why dont we hear from you and ben about baylor? where’s the outcry about baylor denying tenure to women prof’s? could you ask ben about this?

Judging from what can be read on OutPost, about Dr. PP deposition with Mr. Richardson, You ‘All have a Lot of Egg on Your Faces. You Worship an Idol instead of the Lord. I don’t see any of You ‘All committing on these Post on OutPost . Truth Hurts doesn’t it?

They have, in response, accused you of being an idolatrous non-Christian juvenile unworthy of the pastorate.

Man, you've really got to learn to be a compassionate Christ-follower and tone down the rhetoric some so that you can cease to be a troll and someday, somehow, attain the high level of sophistication that your attackers have achieved.

But to answer your question, Baylor's tenure practices will receive precisely as much attention over here as Baylor's Presidential Mansion received back during the whole square-footage saga. This armada has as many cannons as any Navy afloat; it's just that the gunports have only been cut on the starboard side of the ships.

Baylor and swbts have something in common.march 25 bp article: Spike in Baylor tenure denials protested“…whether you get tenure is based not on merit or Christian commitment but on the whim of a CAPRICIOUS President.”

Actually, a senior pastor's biblical role is: (1) preaching; (2) leading; and, (3) pastoral care--and none of the three is "primary". Each without the other is ineffective, a kind of ministry God intends for no one.

In the situation I mentioned earlier, the matter was addressed by the deacon body--graciously and firmly. I am acquainted with other senior pastors who also hold PhD's and serve very well, so the matter really boils down to the personal maturity of the individual. My point earlier simply was meant to support Wade's: why strongly encourage an undergrad student to obtain a PhD, train that student in his or her discipline (in this case, Dr. K and Hebrew), and then insist that the Scriptures actually prevent the person from filling the role trained for?

Nothing Devious and Sinful as what happened from the time PP was hired until the removal of from Dr. Sheri Klouda. Why wasn’t Dr, Patterson honest up front rather than Sinning all that time by being Devious.

You know, blog comments make it clear that we all like to point at every one's specks and logs, often overlooking our own. And, yes, I am saying that we all have them: me, Wade, Bart, Klouda, Debbie, Patterson, Ben, Bob, yes even Bob, you name it...

The one really incredible thing about realizing that we all have shortcomings and make judgments - that we all fall short of God's glory - is that God loves us all in spite of it. Praise God that he can use even our pettiness to demonstrate His great love.

Bryan: Yes, you are correct. If anyone will admit faults it is I who will willingly do so. But it's not wrong to point out injustices. If that were the case Paul would have been sinning greatly as he did this several times. The book of Galatians for example, where Paul spoke of wrong teaching and named the group doing it. There are other examples I could give. God is a God of love, but he also put in each one of us a desire for justice to those who have been badly treated. Paul spoke of this on occassion as well as Christ himself. No I am not Christ, but He is in me, and doesn't God tell us to Hate what He hates?

I understand this is tough on some who desire peace, I desire peace as well, but Bryan, I can't stop hating injustice. I can't stop pointing it out with documentation. I feel that the calling of a Christian is to hate injustice as well and to speak against it. I am not saying this to chew you out, believe me. I have the deepest respect for you, but please don't tie the hands of those who are feel the deep need to bring these things out in the open. To speak with complete transparency, while longing for peace and love to return to the church. Just not at any price.

You can't be serious. Are you really asking two SBC ministers who's church gives to the cooperative program, why they aren't questioning the personnel decisions of another baptist school who doesn't receive CP dollars.

I think I have an answer for you....Baylor isn't accountable to them.....SWBTS is.

I am not offended at all by your comment. It only shows that I wasn't understood. I too HATE injustice and I agree that injustice must be exposed. Exposing injustice is not contrary to peacemaking.

But it is just as wrong to fight with those who are not the enemy and to use sarcasm and words not designed to edify. It is just as wrong to judge those who are being used by the enemy to work injustice. We must lovingly call on them to repent, and, even if they do not, we must still love them. Praise God HE loves us that way since we find a way to sin at every turn.

You say not peace at any price, but Christ paid the ultimate price for reconciliation and peace. Are we willing ot do the same? Are we willing to die to our "rights"? Are we willing to die to our right to be heard? To be right?

Peace doesn't mean don't have righteous passion for justice (because we must), but as with all aspects of God, a focus on one part of a binary truth to the detriment of its twin falls short of His glory. If we focus on justice without mercy, then we are not being like God.

Finally, if you read my comment my focus was not on the subject of the post or a cry against the call for justice - it was a cry agaist the pettiness going on in the comments (and throughout the "baptist" blogosphere). I hope to focus on Christ and encourage others to do the same. It's hard to do when we keep poking one another in the eyes with petty comments.

Sorry for the lengthy comment... I hope I'm clear that we must be champions of justice. (But we must also remember that the battle is spiritual - not one of words - save more words for intercessory prayer than fighting with brothers and sisters or any human.)

My passion for justice is why I'm doing what I do. I get to feed the poor, preach to the oppressed, wash the feet of the sick and dying, and share my life with those who are among the least (and even do it with my family) and who don't even have jobs to start with.

It is quite alright. I am sorry for not being more sensitive. I should remember that sarcasm does not translate well in the blog world. I appreciate your passion for justice. I share that passion in my own context. It is one of the reasons I like to read what Wade and others have to say.